Boge: thanks for the link, no I had not heard of him. I shall have to see if Greg knows of him, it is such a small community I would presume he has.
You know I have twice driven I-40 through Texas in the last year, once as recently as a few weeks ago, and not felt I had the time to swing north for an hour and see Adobe Walls, or what there is of it. Feel pretty guilty about those missed opportunities. OK, the wife was with me and while I thought of it I could hear "you want to go where?" playing in the back of my mind.
Buffalo camp - wet plate photos
-
gschult3
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:46 pm
All,
Thanks to the good Mr Hunt for telling me about this forum and this thread in particular. I therefore registered so I can post, it’s taken a few days for my account to be activated but such is now done. My response is rather a long one but hopefully can address various observations made throughout this thread. Indeed, it was a great day making collodion wetplate photographs at Mr Hunt’s place. The humidity and temperature that day were perfect for my chemicals to work just right and not get too persnickety. Though was a bit windy, I couldn’t have asked for a better day to make wetplate photographs.
There have been a lot of insightful posts to this thread and I’ll address a few of them here. My apologies to those reading this looking for big bore info, the ‘shooting’ referred to here is entirely off topic from the norm in this forum I suspect.
Exposure time for wetplate photographs range quite a bit, though there are certain light conditions better for making photographs than others. Late morning through late afternoon overcast diffused light is best for me. Direct sunlight works well too, though high noon isn’t too good for me. Partly sunny/cloudy is all around bad. And all impact the contrast to the photograph differently. I’m getting better at figuring out exposure times and such times depend on which of my lenses I’m using as well. My two workhorse lenses are an original late 1850s Holmes, Booth & Hayden portrait lens and an 1870s Darlot Hemispherique Rapide No. 4 field lens, the latter of which has Waterhouse stops which sharpen the image and remove some edge lens distortions though use of such extend exposure times a bit. The portrait lens, on the other hand, is a full bore open lens intended for use in diffused light (studio) – this one is a bugger in bright direct sunlight where exposure times can be even just 3 seconds and the results vary even then. If a day is too dark an exposure can run over 15 seconds but at that point breathing and eye blinking naturally will impact the detail. So, ultimately, the preferred method of getting my photographs to turn out are a using a good deal of edjumacated guessing and frequently consulting the Zodiac.
Photographic process is worth noting here as well. Japanned metal (ferrotype) plates are what I currently make, though will be doing glass (ambrotype) plates soon as well. Each plate is a unique positive image. For starters, I use period 19th century recipes and ingredients for all of my photographic chemicals. To make a wetplate photograph a plate is covered with bromided collodion poured on and excess drained off. After about 10-15 seconds this collodion skin (i.e. film) left on the plate is just tacky enough - not too wet or too dry - to take into the dark room and submerge in a bath of silver nitrate solution to soak for 5-ish minutes or more. The sensitized plate is then loaded into the plate holder and taken out of the darkroom to the pre-focused camera where the ground glass view pane (used to focus the subject, who’s image reflected on the glass is upside-down and backwards) is removed and the plate holder is installed. The subject of the photograph now sits completely still for the exposure. Remove the dark slide from the plate holder, remove the lens cap to make the exposure. Put the cap back on the camera lens, put the dark slide back in plate holder. Take plate holder off the back of the camera and into the dark room. Remove plate from plate holder and pour an acetic acid and ferrous sulfate solution over the plate for 10-25 seconds (developer is a whole chapter on its own so will not go into that here). After developing is complete the image on the plate looks like a negative. Then rinse plate with water and submerge the plate in a fixer solution (potassium cyanide solution works best for me though sodium thiosulfate solution will work in a pinch) and agitate the plate for about a minute. At this point the big change happens to the image on the plate: the darks change to lights, the lights change to darks and it now looks like the period photographs you’re accustomed to seeing. Rinse plate again with water and voila – a wet plate positive image is born. We’ll not go into the gum sandarac and lavender based period varnish that goes on plates as it is rather involved and though a nice thing to add durability to the plate is not required. Of interest, from loading the sensitized plate into the plate holder to developing the photograph there is a 5 maybe up to 10 minute window to get everything done or the plate will dry out and no longer be capable of capturing an image - hence the name ‘wet’ plate photography, it has to be wet with silver nitrate solution to work.
All of the above might be of interest to know when it comes to why modern black & white photography images cannot quite replicate the old ‘look’ of wetplate photographs. Between the ingredients and process detailed above, coupled with historically period lens distortions inherent with the old lenses – though the detail of an in-focus wetplate image has amazing depth and detail in the center – I don’t believe that such a look can be recreated short of going through all of the above processes. The depth of focus and image detail is unrivaled and quite different from that of modern photography, not sure what the secret is but my opinion is it’s in the nature of the salted collodion skin related to being excited by sensitized the silver bath. In ‘artistic’ circles (of which I’m pleased to say I’m not involved with) wetplate photography using the above process is considered today as an alternative art form as it is such a powerful communicator of focus and unique contrast that can’t be replicated with modern techniques. Also, the technical aspects to getting the chemicals mixed right and working together in relation to the weather conditions and light conditions of the moment is quite a feat in itself. As to reflection or shine/sheen on metallic items; it is there but the ‘shine’ is more of a level of brightness in period photographs – it’s hard to describe. The items that appear to be aluminum in some of Mr Hunt’s photographs are, in fact, hot tin dipped rolled iron and newer hot tin dipped stuff is shiny like a mirror. Everything in a period photograph isn’t just affected by shine or color but also by texture in general and shades/contrast in period photos range accordingly. If you’re keen for a ‘where’s Waldo’ moment take a look at the first photo Mr Hunt posted in this thread – on the trunk you’ll see an original silver plated ‘tipped’ pattern spoon that I placed specifically for the handle to catch the light and stand out in the picture just to have some fun. It worked well enough by ensuring it was facing the lens ‘just right’ so it somewhat stands out. I also did the same in a different photograph of Mr Hunt dressed as a CS cavalryman by positioning the blade of the sabre in his hand specifically for the interesting lighting effect and it looks pretty cool. Had I not positioned these items just right they would not have seemed nearly as bright. So even a given item can look different in different photographs depending on light reflection, light available for the picture, exposure time, yada, yada. There was a post earlier in this thread that mentioned yellow and there is something to that. My dark room is, in fact, very bright inside and its tent is completely yellow made from yellow fabric. If all works well I posted both a color picture and ferrotype of my portable dark room in this post (my ‘dark room’ is actually a Victorian era trunk I converted into a ‘dark trunk’ using an 1875 patent drawing as a model) so you can see it and how different yellow looks between modern and period photography. Using yellow today to cover such a portable dark room would not likely yield good results with modern photography but yellow/amber were the colors of choice for a light-safe photographic environment in the wetplate photographic era. As to a hat being kicked-back on the head in period photographs: Just ask Mr Hunt how much I fussed with his hats all day by pushing them back on his head and rolling the brim up just before making a photograph. Had I not done this his face would have been too dark though eyes still visible (this condition I’ve heard called the ‘raccoon eyes’ effect). So yes, less shade over the face is the only way I can make a decent photograph. Hats are my natural enemy though look great in period photographs. I can’t say that wearing hats kicked-back on the head was common back in the day but I know through experience that such must be done in period photography in order to see the subject’s face and avoid ‘raccoon eyes’.
I’m not sure if this lengthy post has helped much regarding all the great questions asked in this thread. I certainly did not address anything helpful regarding modern photography attempting to replicate the look of a wetplate collodion photograph. Though I know nothing of modern film or digital photography my gut feeling is that modern photography and subsequent computer alterations of such photographs cannot replicate the look and depth of collodion wetplate photography. What I can say however, in closing, is that taking up wetplate photography as a hobby has been an extremely interesting effort and has given me some very unique insights into rather obscure 19th century material culture. And being able to make wetplate photographs whenever I want is pretty amazing, certainly opens up interesting opportunities such as at some point going to Gettysburg to recreate some Sullivan shots, down the street to Greenfield Village to get a picture of the Daniel Webster home, or any other interesting historic site or building, etc. It’s been a helluva journey so far and was very much worth the effort.
G
p.s. Greetings again to Clark B – you’re a man of many interests and it’s nice to see you’re here.
Restored late Victorian Ansco Camera Company studio camera (adapted to wetplate) with c1870s Darlot “No. 4 Hemispherique Rapideâ€
Thanks to the good Mr Hunt for telling me about this forum and this thread in particular. I therefore registered so I can post, it’s taken a few days for my account to be activated but such is now done. My response is rather a long one but hopefully can address various observations made throughout this thread. Indeed, it was a great day making collodion wetplate photographs at Mr Hunt’s place. The humidity and temperature that day were perfect for my chemicals to work just right and not get too persnickety. Though was a bit windy, I couldn’t have asked for a better day to make wetplate photographs.
There have been a lot of insightful posts to this thread and I’ll address a few of them here. My apologies to those reading this looking for big bore info, the ‘shooting’ referred to here is entirely off topic from the norm in this forum I suspect.
Exposure time for wetplate photographs range quite a bit, though there are certain light conditions better for making photographs than others. Late morning through late afternoon overcast diffused light is best for me. Direct sunlight works well too, though high noon isn’t too good for me. Partly sunny/cloudy is all around bad. And all impact the contrast to the photograph differently. I’m getting better at figuring out exposure times and such times depend on which of my lenses I’m using as well. My two workhorse lenses are an original late 1850s Holmes, Booth & Hayden portrait lens and an 1870s Darlot Hemispherique Rapide No. 4 field lens, the latter of which has Waterhouse stops which sharpen the image and remove some edge lens distortions though use of such extend exposure times a bit. The portrait lens, on the other hand, is a full bore open lens intended for use in diffused light (studio) – this one is a bugger in bright direct sunlight where exposure times can be even just 3 seconds and the results vary even then. If a day is too dark an exposure can run over 15 seconds but at that point breathing and eye blinking naturally will impact the detail. So, ultimately, the preferred method of getting my photographs to turn out are a using a good deal of edjumacated guessing and frequently consulting the Zodiac.
Photographic process is worth noting here as well. Japanned metal (ferrotype) plates are what I currently make, though will be doing glass (ambrotype) plates soon as well. Each plate is a unique positive image. For starters, I use period 19th century recipes and ingredients for all of my photographic chemicals. To make a wetplate photograph a plate is covered with bromided collodion poured on and excess drained off. After about 10-15 seconds this collodion skin (i.e. film) left on the plate is just tacky enough - not too wet or too dry - to take into the dark room and submerge in a bath of silver nitrate solution to soak for 5-ish minutes or more. The sensitized plate is then loaded into the plate holder and taken out of the darkroom to the pre-focused camera where the ground glass view pane (used to focus the subject, who’s image reflected on the glass is upside-down and backwards) is removed and the plate holder is installed. The subject of the photograph now sits completely still for the exposure. Remove the dark slide from the plate holder, remove the lens cap to make the exposure. Put the cap back on the camera lens, put the dark slide back in plate holder. Take plate holder off the back of the camera and into the dark room. Remove plate from plate holder and pour an acetic acid and ferrous sulfate solution over the plate for 10-25 seconds (developer is a whole chapter on its own so will not go into that here). After developing is complete the image on the plate looks like a negative. Then rinse plate with water and submerge the plate in a fixer solution (potassium cyanide solution works best for me though sodium thiosulfate solution will work in a pinch) and agitate the plate for about a minute. At this point the big change happens to the image on the plate: the darks change to lights, the lights change to darks and it now looks like the period photographs you’re accustomed to seeing. Rinse plate again with water and voila – a wet plate positive image is born. We’ll not go into the gum sandarac and lavender based period varnish that goes on plates as it is rather involved and though a nice thing to add durability to the plate is not required. Of interest, from loading the sensitized plate into the plate holder to developing the photograph there is a 5 maybe up to 10 minute window to get everything done or the plate will dry out and no longer be capable of capturing an image - hence the name ‘wet’ plate photography, it has to be wet with silver nitrate solution to work.
All of the above might be of interest to know when it comes to why modern black & white photography images cannot quite replicate the old ‘look’ of wetplate photographs. Between the ingredients and process detailed above, coupled with historically period lens distortions inherent with the old lenses – though the detail of an in-focus wetplate image has amazing depth and detail in the center – I don’t believe that such a look can be recreated short of going through all of the above processes. The depth of focus and image detail is unrivaled and quite different from that of modern photography, not sure what the secret is but my opinion is it’s in the nature of the salted collodion skin related to being excited by sensitized the silver bath. In ‘artistic’ circles (of which I’m pleased to say I’m not involved with) wetplate photography using the above process is considered today as an alternative art form as it is such a powerful communicator of focus and unique contrast that can’t be replicated with modern techniques. Also, the technical aspects to getting the chemicals mixed right and working together in relation to the weather conditions and light conditions of the moment is quite a feat in itself. As to reflection or shine/sheen on metallic items; it is there but the ‘shine’ is more of a level of brightness in period photographs – it’s hard to describe. The items that appear to be aluminum in some of Mr Hunt’s photographs are, in fact, hot tin dipped rolled iron and newer hot tin dipped stuff is shiny like a mirror. Everything in a period photograph isn’t just affected by shine or color but also by texture in general and shades/contrast in period photos range accordingly. If you’re keen for a ‘where’s Waldo’ moment take a look at the first photo Mr Hunt posted in this thread – on the trunk you’ll see an original silver plated ‘tipped’ pattern spoon that I placed specifically for the handle to catch the light and stand out in the picture just to have some fun. It worked well enough by ensuring it was facing the lens ‘just right’ so it somewhat stands out. I also did the same in a different photograph of Mr Hunt dressed as a CS cavalryman by positioning the blade of the sabre in his hand specifically for the interesting lighting effect and it looks pretty cool. Had I not positioned these items just right they would not have seemed nearly as bright. So even a given item can look different in different photographs depending on light reflection, light available for the picture, exposure time, yada, yada. There was a post earlier in this thread that mentioned yellow and there is something to that. My dark room is, in fact, very bright inside and its tent is completely yellow made from yellow fabric. If all works well I posted both a color picture and ferrotype of my portable dark room in this post (my ‘dark room’ is actually a Victorian era trunk I converted into a ‘dark trunk’ using an 1875 patent drawing as a model) so you can see it and how different yellow looks between modern and period photography. Using yellow today to cover such a portable dark room would not likely yield good results with modern photography but yellow/amber were the colors of choice for a light-safe photographic environment in the wetplate photographic era. As to a hat being kicked-back on the head in period photographs: Just ask Mr Hunt how much I fussed with his hats all day by pushing them back on his head and rolling the brim up just before making a photograph. Had I not done this his face would have been too dark though eyes still visible (this condition I’ve heard called the ‘raccoon eyes’ effect). So yes, less shade over the face is the only way I can make a decent photograph. Hats are my natural enemy though look great in period photographs. I can’t say that wearing hats kicked-back on the head was common back in the day but I know through experience that such must be done in period photography in order to see the subject’s face and avoid ‘raccoon eyes’.
I’m not sure if this lengthy post has helped much regarding all the great questions asked in this thread. I certainly did not address anything helpful regarding modern photography attempting to replicate the look of a wetplate collodion photograph. Though I know nothing of modern film or digital photography my gut feeling is that modern photography and subsequent computer alterations of such photographs cannot replicate the look and depth of collodion wetplate photography. What I can say however, in closing, is that taking up wetplate photography as a hobby has been an extremely interesting effort and has given me some very unique insights into rather obscure 19th century material culture. And being able to make wetplate photographs whenever I want is pretty amazing, certainly opens up interesting opportunities such as at some point going to Gettysburg to recreate some Sullivan shots, down the street to Greenfield Village to get a picture of the Daniel Webster home, or any other interesting historic site or building, etc. It’s been a helluva journey so far and was very much worth the effort.
G
p.s. Greetings again to Clark B – you’re a man of many interests and it’s nice to see you’re here.
Restored late Victorian Ansco Camera Company studio camera (adapted to wetplate) with c1870s Darlot “No. 4 Hemispherique Rapideâ€
Last edited by gschult3 on Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks for taking the time to post. Are you setting up for any NCOWS events as I`m sure they`d line up in droves for period photos?-
Clark B
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:29 pm
- Location: Southern Indiana
-
James Hunt
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 1:00 pm
- Location: Chelsea, MI
-
gschult3
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:46 pm
Mr Hunt - Thanks for posting the photograph showing the Enfield sabre, that one really shows the reflection from the blade very well. I don't think we could pull that one off again if we tried. I'm glad you posted some of those pictures we did, this has been a very interesting thread with all the insightful questions.
Clark B - See if your wife would be keen to support your being a wetplate collodion photographer: She'd love it...! By the bye, as I know you're keen on and appreciate such things, here is some info on Mr Hunt's photo above: Cap is from G. Starbuck, NC jacket is an old B. Tart logwood piece-dyed jeans wool, roller buckle on the belt is from TMD, boots from R. Land, and holster is a c1860s slim jim based off one shown in Packing Iron. Gotta love the nit-noid details.
Boge - Thanks for the kind words, the period photography schtick has been a pretty amazing experience and a lot of fun. I don't intend to set-up at NCOWS shoots or anywhere to make photographs, I'm just doing this stuff as a hobby and alternate living history impression.
G
Clark B - See if your wife would be keen to support your being a wetplate collodion photographer: She'd love it...! By the bye, as I know you're keen on and appreciate such things, here is some info on Mr Hunt's photo above: Cap is from G. Starbuck, NC jacket is an old B. Tart logwood piece-dyed jeans wool, roller buckle on the belt is from TMD, boots from R. Land, and holster is a c1860s slim jim based off one shown in Packing Iron. Gotta love the nit-noid details.
Boge - Thanks for the kind words, the period photography schtick has been a pretty amazing experience and a lot of fun. I don't intend to set-up at NCOWS shoots or anywhere to make photographs, I'm just doing this stuff as a hobby and alternate living history impression.
G
-
Clark B
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:29 pm
- Location: Southern Indiana
Can you guess the style jacket I was wearing in the image I posted? Starbuck made the cap I was wearing and it was real close to the original, as close as could be made at the time. Everything else I made. Ah the good ole days when I was fresh off active duty, in school, and no real responsibilities.
-
pete
- Posts: 2259
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 10:16 pm
- Location: Colorado
gshult3;
Very interesting thanks for the insight into how it works. This period photo interst would definately be heavy on the research side and is a unique activity.
Something I've thought interesting is that the act of placing the lens cap on doesn't cause a disortion or blurr of some kind. I know that the exposure time is rather lengthy but even so I'd think it would still show.
Curious as to what length do you think the lenses you have would equate to? Such as 18 mm, 50mm etc.
Very interesting thanks for the insight into how it works. This period photo interst would definately be heavy on the research side and is a unique activity.
Something I've thought interesting is that the act of placing the lens cap on doesn't cause a disortion or blurr of some kind. I know that the exposure time is rather lengthy but even so I'd think it would still show.
Curious as to what length do you think the lenses you have would equate to? Such as 18 mm, 50mm etc.
-
gschult3
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:46 pm
Pete – Indeed, there has been a lot of research I’ve put into this though the lion’s share of effort has gone into practice, practice, practice. I was surprised to see how long it took for me to be able to make a decent picture much less make them consistently. However, once that hurdle is over making photographs is not nearly as frustrating.
Interesting question about the lens cap. No matter how short the exposure time I’ve never experienced any sort of shadow or other ill effect to a photograph due to the lens cap. Logically one would think there would be an impact but I haven’t noticed it in any of my photographs. I think because the exposure times are so long compared to modern photography that even a short exposure of a few seconds is still a long exposure by any modern comparison. So the quick motion of removing and then putting the cap back on is not noticeable in the picture.
As for the brass barrel lenses, there are two measurements I’ll provide. 1st measurement: The lens mounted on my camera pictured above is about 1.75â€
Interesting question about the lens cap. No matter how short the exposure time I’ve never experienced any sort of shadow or other ill effect to a photograph due to the lens cap. Logically one would think there would be an impact but I haven’t noticed it in any of my photographs. I think because the exposure times are so long compared to modern photography that even a short exposure of a few seconds is still a long exposure by any modern comparison. So the quick motion of removing and then putting the cap back on is not noticeable in the picture.
As for the brass barrel lenses, there are two measurements I’ll provide. 1st measurement: The lens mounted on my camera pictured above is about 1.75â€